(PS) Miner v. National Aeronautics & Space Administration, No. 2:2019cv01576 - Document 7 (E.D. Cal. 2020)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 4/10/2020 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 30 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Huang, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 POCAHONTAS formerly known as MADIHA MINER Plaintiff, 13 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS v. 14 15 No. 2:19-cv-1576 KJM DB PS NATIONAL AERONAUTICS & SPACE ADMINISTRATION, 16 Defendant. 17 Plaintiff Madiha Miner is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the 18 19 undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). By order 20 signed February 21, 2020, plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed, and plaintiff was granted leave to 21 file an amended complaint that cured the defects noted in that order. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff was 22 granted twenty-eight days from the date of that order to file an amended complaint and was 23 specifically cautioned that the failure to respond to the court’s order in a timely manner would 24 result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. (Id. at 5.) The twenty-eight-day period 25 has expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order in any manner. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 26 27 prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 28 //// 1 1 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 2 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty days after 3 being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with 4 the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 5 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 6 specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 7 order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 Dated: April 10, 2020 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DLB:6 DB\orders\orders.pro se\miner1576.fta.f&rs 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
